Should there just be a "Mass shooting in the US" sticky thread?

[PastorLiz]

View attachment 970873

 

[D-rock]

I'm not using anybody for a scapegoat, I'm just blaming EVERYBODY. As I said, plenty of white and black trash, I'm not giving immigrants a pass, if they happen to be guilty too. I seriously doubt most criminals are using guns they bought under their real name. I would need to see proof of that. I also said I want the citizens that ruin it for everyone dealt with harshly also. You seem to wanna paint me a racist, as opposed to someone whose tired of seeing people get to lenient of a punishment, usually leading to further crime. AGAIN! ALL trash, don't care who, don't care gender, don't care color. If you abuse the 2nd Amendment, and or the lawful people of this country you ruin it for the good people, you should pay, with everything you can pay with, including your life. In fact, I'm all for letting a parent of a murdered child or spouse who's lost someone, flip the switch when it comes time for payment. In fact, they should get to choose the method of execution, within a set parameter of choices.

Ahhh, the good old Whataboutsim/Bothsiderism argument along with some nonsensical spiel about harsher punishments/get tough on crime shit that hasn't ever been effective in the entirety of our history, along with stupid stuff earlier about making schools get closer to hardened bunkers. I'm half surprised you didn't go and suggest everybody in school just be armed at this point while your at it. You have no solutions. The only things that might have a hope of working you don't want to do. You know the stuff that all the rest of the first world nations actually do. I believe you actually believe what you say, so that leaves me with the conclusion you're too intellectually bereft to argue with on this.

At some level I'd have a modicum more respect it you just flat out came out and said you just don't care enough for things to change, and your willing to accept all the lives killed because of it. That would at least be more logically consistent and honest.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Ahhh, the good old Whataboutsim/Bothsiderism argument along with some nonsensical spiel about harsher punishments/get tough on crime shit that hasn't ever been effective in the entirety of our history, along with stupid stuff earlier about making schools get closer to hardened bunkers. I'm half surprised you didn't go and suggest everybody in school just be armed at this point while your at it. You have no solutions. The only things that might have a hope of working you don't want to do. You know the stuff that all the rest of the first world nations actually do. I believe you actually believe what you say, so that leaves me with the conclusion you're too intellectually bereft to argue with on this.

At some level I'd have a modicum more respect it you just flat out came out and said you just don't care enough for things to change, and your willing to accept all the lives killed because of it. That would at least be more logically consistent and honest.

Whether or not you respect me means very little to me. I really don't give a craptastic flying flaming fuck, in a rolling donut, what your opinion is of me, or my beliefs are. This is just the internet, it doesn't count for much, in the grand scheme of life.

 

[Straight Shooter]

Police Have No Duty to Protect the Public​

Last Wednesday, after a 24-hour search, a suspect was apprehended in the New York City Sunset Park subway shooting that injured at least 10 people. Amid the predictable gun control and police funding debates that have begun to roil across social media, it’s fair to also ask: Why wasn’t the NYPD more effective in responding to the situation?

After the shooting, the NYPD was faulted for not stopping the subway lines, having their radio and communications apparatuses malfunction, and exhibiting a plain lack of urgency, as The Intercept reported. Indeed, some speculated that the only reason they caught the suspect, Frank James, was because he made it really easy for them. He had lunch at Katz’s Deli during the manhunt, before tipping off the police himself.

This fits with a number of incidents where police have failed to protect the public; yet, as the Prospect’s Ryan Cooper wrote, they are routinely given more money after tragedies. The questions that get asked in the aftermath are limited: Do police lack the resources to prevent crimes, or did they make tactical or logistical errors that can be fixed with new leadership or more training?

All of these questions are situated in the traditional belief that police are there to proactively prevent and deescalate dangerous situations. The average citizen has been convinced of this imagery of police as heroic and uniquely brave citizens, despite being debunked both by the actions of police forces and the courts themselves.

Let us go back eleven years to February 2011, in the very same place, New York City. As he told in a Cracked.com video some four years ago, Joseph Lozito was on his morning commute through New York City when he hopped on the subway, blissfully unaware of a brutal stabbing spree—perpetuated by Maksim Gelman—that had been going on for over 24 hours at that point.

Lozito would be the final victim in the stint. After Gelman boarded the train and confronted the police officers that were in a secure area, he turned to Lozito and said, “You’re going to die.”

What transpired afterwards was what Lozito described as what “every man thinks about at least twice a day.” Lozito tackled Gelman and they struggled physically, with Gelman stabbing Lozito in the head until they both hit the ground and Lozito disarmed Gelman. Only then did the NYPD officers intervene to apprehend Gelman.

In this case, one of the cops allegedly admitted that he did not intervene in the altercation because he thought Gelman had a gun, instead hiding from the attacker. This prompted Lozito to sue the city of New York. He lost the case in 2013, but not because the Manhattan Supreme Court judge didn’t believe him, or because he lacked evidence, or because the cops had a good reason for not intervening. Lozito lost because of a precedent established by the U.S. Supreme Court: the cops do not have a duty to protect you, or anyone.

In 2005, Jessica Gonzales sued Castle Rock, Colorado police for failing to arrest her husband, who had violated a protective order, resulting in the murder of her three children. Her case went to the U.S. Supreme Court in The Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, where she lost because even though the order required arresting her husband upon violation, then-Justice Antonin Scalia successfully argued that “a well-established tradition of police discretion has long coexisted with apparently mandatory arrest statutes.”


This case builds upon Supreme Court precedent in Deshaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1989). In that case, a young boy was repeatedly abused at the hands of his father, something that county Social Services was aware of, but made no effort to remove the child. His mother sued once the four-year old entered a vegetative state, and the Court ruled that that the state did not have a special obligation to protect a citizen against harms it did not create.

Based on these precedents, Lozito was told in the New York City case that “no direct promises of protection were made” to him, and therefore he could not sue the police for failing to come to his aid. In other words, the police do not have to act if someone is actively being harmed, they do not have to arrest someone who has violated orders, and they do not have any obligation to protect you from others.

People are still expected to call the police, and many still do, especially given the lack of alternatives. But to criticize their effectiveness in solving crimes in the aftermath furthers the propaganda: It assumes that the police are acting in the interest of the public, when there is no precedent that says that they have to.

Police reform activists have posited that the purpose of policing is not to protect the public, but instead to maintain the status quo that keeps capitalism alive. The first modern-day police were slave catchers; their only interest was your body for their profit. Whatever their true purpose, the legal fact remains that public benefits from policing are incidental, at best.

https://prospect.org/justice/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-public/

 

[Steve-FreeOnes]

View attachment 970873

Keep your unfunny meme shit out of this thread and, in fact, off the board completely.

 

[Johan]

Forget the "good guys with guns", say "Hello" to the cowards with guns

‘Go in There!’ Exasperated Onlookers Urged Cops to Rush School as Gunman Was Inside​

Bystanders outside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas pleaded with law enforcement officers to rush the school as a gunman was inside, the Associated Press reported late Wednesday night.
Separately, a video posted online – which appears authentic – purports to show onlookers yelling at police outside a perimeter around the school.

An 18-year-old shooter murdered 19 children and two teachers at the school on Tuesday. Eventually, he was killed by a tactical unit from Border Patrol.

An eyewitness named Juan Carranza told the AP that people outside the school shouted at officers to enter the school as the gunman was inside.
“Go in there! Go in there!” they yelled.

According to a New York Times report published earlier on Wednesday, the shooter was inside the school for roughly one hour as police waited outside.
And a Washington Post report – published after the AP piece – gave a more detailed, albeit incomplete account.

It stated the school announced a “lockdown” on Facebook by 11:43 a.m., and that shots were still being heard as of 12:52 p.m., at which time a voice on an EMS channel warned, “Do not attempt to get closer.”
At 1:06 p.m., Uvalde policed declared the situation was over.

Here is the Post’s account:
One lingering question is when exactly the shooting began. Authorities agree that the gunman was dead by 1 p.m. but have offered conflicting accounts as to whether the attack began around 11:30 a.m. or closer to noon. By 11:43 a.m., the school announced on Facebook that it was under lockdown, citing gunshots in the area. “The students and staff are safe in the building,” it said.

In public transmissions on a radio channel used by local EMS workers, someone said at 11:53 a.m. that a lieutenant had requested a response to the area of the school. As the response was discussed, one official was heard telling first responders: “Please, just stay back.”

[…]

By 12:10 p.m., a Facebook live stream recorded outside the front of the school showed police cars had established a perimeter, helicopters were flying overhead and onlookers had gathered. Seven minutes later, school authorities announced on social media there was “an active shooter at Robb Elementary.”

After hearing shooting, authorities said, a tactical team formed a “stack” formation and eventually breached the classroom door and killed Ramos in a shootout. Ramos was in the room for some time before police officers entered, and it was unclear whether he killed the students when he first barricaded himself inside or just before the police breached the room.

At 1:06 p.m., Uvalde Police announced on social media that the attack was over.

Shots were still being heard at 12:52 p.m., according to radio recordings. “Do not attempt to get closer,” a voice warned on the EMS channel.

Given the school’s 11:43 a.m. Facebook announcement of the “lockdown” due to “gunshots in the area,” as well as the reports of gunfire as late as 12:52 p.m., some parents were able to make it to the scene as the incident was ongoing.
The AP report said Javier Cazares, whose fourth-grade daughter was killed in the shooting, arrived at the school when police while still outside. Cazares was “upset that police were not moving in.” In response, he told he AP he floated the idea of storming the school with other bystanders.
“Let’s just rush in because the cops aren’t doing anything like they are supposed to,” he said during the incident.
“They were unprepared,” Cazares said afterward.

Indeed, one video purports to show bystanders and/or students’ parents outside a police perimeter. In the video, cops are seen holding back individuals who are literally wailing and screaming with concern.

Lt. Christopher Olivarez of the Texas Department of Public Safety told CNN the gunman had “barricaded himself by locking the door and just started shooting children and teachers that were inside that classroom.”
However, the AP reported the gunman was finally killed by law enforcement after a member of school staff merely used a key to unlock the door to the room where the gunman was.
“Meanwhile, a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation said the Border Patrol agents had trouble breaching the classroom door and had to get a staff member to open the room with a key,” the AP stated. “The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation.”

https://www.mediaite.com/crime/go-i...rge-cops-to-rush-school-as-gunman-was-inside/


For god sake, there's a shooter in the school, targeting kids, what are you waiting for ? How could things get uglier ? Are the cops scared to confront a crazy guys with guns ? Or is it that police authorities thinks they'd rather have kids killed than cops killed ?

 

[gmase]

Keep your unfunny meme shit out of this thread and, in fact, off the board completely.

Thanks for cleaning that shit up. No matter how times it gets proven false, some still love to promote it.

//

Since when did gun ownership become a fundamental human right?
Wayne LaPierre: '“Restricting the fundamental human right of law-abiding Americans to defend themselves is not the answer. It never has been,”
https://thehill.com/business-a-lobb...-calls-gun-ownership-fundamental-human-right/

Ted Cruz gets it right: “That son of a bitch passed a background check,”
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas/article261856230.html

It's clear background checks don't work.

 

[gmase]

My team isn't winning. My team wants to keep their rights, and remove them from criminals.

An 18-year old can buy a military-grade weapon with no training whatsoever. Yes, your team is winning.

 

[Johan]

Ted Cruz gets it right: “That son of a bitch passed a background check,”
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas/article261856230.html

It's clear background checks don't work.

According to CBS News’ summary of Texas Department of Public Safety Lt. Christopher Olivarez’s account, the shooter “stormed Robb Elementary School in the small city of Uvalde shortly after crashing his car in the area and immediately engaged in gunfire with state troopers on the scene. The gunman shot several police officers and then locked himself in a classroom.”
Olivarez told NBC's “TODAY” show that the gunman’s shooting of police officers prompted them to break windows around the school to evacuate children and teachers.
According to various reports, after local officers called for backup, a specialized tactical unit made it into the classroom a full hour after the gunman entered the school, and an agent of an elite law enforcement unit was involved in killing the gunman. (That agent was injured in the process.)

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc...ws-why-arming-teachers-wouldn-t-have-n1295693

"They [didn't] make entry immediately because of the gunfire they were receiving," Mr Escalon told reporters.
Videos have emerged of police being urged by desperate family members to storm the building immediately.
A father whose daughter died in the attack told the Associated Press news agency he had considered running into the school with bystanders out of frustration at the police response

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61600914

Yet gun enthusiasts have the guts to tell us that arming the teachers would be the solution. We've got armed and trained police officers unable to prevent the massacre, some even refusingto enter the building 'cause they're getting shot at.
Yet, we should believe that teachers with guns would handle the issue ?

There's only one solution : BANNING ASSAULT WEAPONS, banning all semi-automatic rifles. You don't need an AR-15 for hunting, you don't need an AR-15 for competitive shooting, you don't need an AR-15 to protect your home.
You need an AR-15 when you're trying to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Your country has banned them, and on 2 fairly recent occasions, you had muslim extremists with FULL AUTO capability, and explosive wreak havoc, and no one was able to stop them. Banning them won't stop it, and when you consider how many are already legally owned, by law abiding people, and criminal organizations deal in weapons and explosives they will always be here. In fact, if you know what household chemicals to mix together, you don't even need gun powder.

More importantly, you don't live here, you aren't a citizen, and you don't pay taxes, so why should you care. Your country gives you everything you want.

 

[Johan]

Your country has banned them, and on 2 fairly recent occasions, you had muslim extremists with FULL AUTO capability, and explosive wreak havoc, and no one was able to stop them. Banning them won't stop it, and when you consider how many are already legally owned, by law abiding people, and criminal organizations deal in weapons and explosives they will always be here. In fact, if you know what household chemicals to mix together, you don't even need gun powder.

The last time we had a school ,shooting here was on March 16th, 2017 : The gunman used a rifle, two handguns and two hand-grenades. Elite police officers were dispatched and the perpetrator was quickly arrested.
The attack left 3 injured, a teacher and 2 students (no critical wounds). A few othe people had to be treated for shock or wounds caused by the panic which ensued the attack.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39292755

No military-grade weapon, no fatalities.

I rest my case

 

[Mr. Daystar]

No military-grade weapon, no fatalities.

TOTAL BULLSHIT!

I didn't say school, I said mass attack, with things that are ILLEGAL in your country, and HEAVILY regulated here. It won't stop, it just won't. Guns are far less a problem, then people. Personally, I think if people didn't have to live in a world that expects them to hug their neighbor, and turn the other cheek, they wouldn't have LESS stress. In fact, I would bet the farm, that if you let that kid that was picked on in school, beat the fuck out of his bullies, he wouldn't come back to gun them down. Your inability to grasp the very simple to understand concept that, "A gun is an inanimate object, that has no sentience, or self mobilizing capability, it cannot act alone." boggles the mind. It is the equivalent of blaming a spoon, because someone is fat.

 

[gmase]

"A gun is an inanimate object, that has no sentience, or self mobilizing capability, it cannot act alone." boggles the mind.

Keep repeating it. We understand the gun is an inanimate object and is triggered by a human. Removing the inanimate object would certainly create some benefits in preventing these murders by humans.

There's only one solution : BANNING ASSAULT WEAPONS, banning all semi-automatic rifles. You don't need an AR-15 for hunting, you don't need an AR-15 for competitive shooting, you don't need an AR-15 to protect your home.
You need an AR-15 when you're trying to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible.

More importantly, you don't live here, you aren't a citizen, and you don't pay taxes, so why should you care. Your country gives you everything you want.

I do live here, I am a citizen, and I do pay taxes. Banning the future sale of assault weapons makes sense.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Keep repeating it. We understand the gun is an inanimate object and is triggered by a human. Removing the inanimate object would certainly create some benefits in preventing these murders by humans.



I do live here, I am a citizen, and I do pay taxes. Banning the future sale of assault weapons makes sense.

To you it makes sense, and to many people, but not to me.
As usual, we disagree, but I would not have posted the same message to you, because I know you live here.

 

[Steve-FreeOnes]

More importantly, you don't live here, you aren't a citizen, and you don't pay taxes, so why should you care. Your country gives you everything you want.

Are you suggesting here that somebody's concern for children being murdered by guns should stop at their national border? Please say no and please say that I've misunderstood you.

 

[Johan]

TOTAL BULLSHIT!

I didn't say school, I said mass attack, with things that are ILLEGAL in your country, and HEAVILY regulated here.

I guess you're takling about the Charlie Hebdo attacks and the Bataclan Attack, right ?
The Bataclan attact was the deadliest attack in french History since WW2. It happened on November 13, 2015. Since that day there has been 106 mass shootings in the US, claiming the live of 655 people.

Your inability to grasp the very simple to understand concept that, "A gun is an inanimate object, that has no sentience, or self mobilizing capability, it cannot act alone." boggles the mind. It is the equivalent of blaming a spoon, because someone is fat.

Blaming guns for dead people is not like blaming spoons for fat people. It's like blaming sodas and donuts for people being fat. Now, if you're fat and you wanna lose some weight, the first thing any doctor will tell you is to stop eating donuts and drinking sodas.
A donut is an inanimate object, that has no sentience, or self mobilizing capability, it cannot act alone. But if you let your kid eat donuts, if you don't put some restrictions to it, if you let him eat as many donuts as he wants, you can bet he's gonna get fat.
Now, if you tell him he can have 1 donut/day, if you give him apples instead of letting him having donuts, if you teach him to eat healthy you improve his chances not to end up fat.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Are you suggesting here that somebody's concern for children being murdered by guns should stop at their national border? Please say no and please say that I've misunderstood you.

You did, my point was, he can't change anything here, but he's banging the drum, like he's leading the charge of righteousness, what he wants is irrelevant, because he can't do anything about it. If you want to see people that don't give a fuck about dead kids, look at ALL of the politicians, because the democrats don't care either, these tragedies are just an excuse they use to disarm a lawful populace. But what do you give fuck for, you already made your opinions of my putrid country, and myself very clear.

 

[Steve-FreeOnes]

But what do you give fuck for, you already made your opinions of my putrid country, and myself very clear.

Because I don't want to see dead children and guns on the street in the hands of *anyone* regardless of where it's happening in the world. Your country is disgusting, and I think I'm in a good position to make that statement because the country I live in is just as bad, maybe in some different ways. But I'm of the frame of mind that maybe there wouldn't be as many mass shootings if people weren't allowed to have the things that cause the mass shootings in the first place.

I don't understand what you're so angry about. You'll still get to keep your little armory over there because one party is happy to see kids get murdered at SCHOOL because some old cunts a couple of hundred years ago wrote it down that people should be able to have guns, and the other is a bunch of spineless pricks who are about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike. Nothing ever changes over there and never will. You won. Go out into your back yard and shoot some empty Sprite bottles or something.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Because I don't want to see dead children and guns on the street in the hands of *anyone* regardless of where it's happening in the world. Your country is disgusting, and I think I'm in a good position to make that statement because the country I live in is just as bad, maybe in some different ways. But I'm of the frame of mind that maybe there wouldn't be as many mass shootings if people weren't allowed to have the things that cause the mass shootings in the first place.

I don't understand what you're so angry about. You'll still get to keep your little armory over there because one party is happy to see kids get murdered at SCHOOL because some old cunts a couple of hundred years ago wrote it down that people should be able to have guns, and the other is a bunch of spineless pricks who are about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike. Nothing ever changes over there and never will. You won. Go out into your back yard and shoot some empty Sprite bottles or something.

First off, when did ANYONE ever once say, "Oh my God, those poor parents. or Those poor innocent lives, all taken way before their time". No one has said anything about the children or the parents, they just jumped on a band wagon, and lit up a torch. The filthy hypocrites screaming in the joke some call our government, did the same thing. In fact, you probably car more about the lose of life then they do.

I'm not angry, I'm sad, at least about this type of stuff, I do get very angry when I hear about people that get away with violent crime, and walk away with a slap, then do it again....and I'm not a dog, I don't get mad, I get pissed, or infuriated. Those old cunts wrote that paper because of your old cunts. We had no choice, you put us in a corner, I don't own an armory, I don't own an AR15 either, I have no use for that, I live in the city.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/el-paso-shooting-trump-pushed-143313796.html